COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2022-07-13
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Latvia, coronavirus disease, corruption, democracy, epidemic, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Luxembourg, 13.7.2022  SWD(2022) 514 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report        Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report          The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2022) 500 final} - {SWD(2022) 501 final} - {SWD(2022) 502 final} - {SWD(2022) 503 final} - {SWD(2022) 504 final} - {SWD(2022) 505 final} - {SWD(2022) 506 final} - {SWD(2022) 507 final} - {SWD(2022) 508 final} - {SWD(2022) 509 final} - {SWD(2022) 510 final} - {SWD(2022) 511 final} - {SWD(2022) 512 final} - {SWD(2022) 513 final} - {SWD(2022) 515 final} - {SWD(2022) 516 final} - {SWD(2022) 517 final} - {SWD(2022) 518 final} - {SWD(2022) 519 final} - {SWD(2022) 520 final} - {SWD(2022) 521 final} - {SWD(2022) 522 final} - {SWD(2022) 523 final} - {SWD(2022) 524 final} - {SWD(2022) 525 final} - {SWD(2022) 526 final} - {SWD(2022) 527 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

A number of reforms to improve the functioning of the Latvian justice system have entered 
into  force.  The  Judicial  Council  further  improved  the  procedure  for  selecting  candidate 
judges and started implementing its strategy, with a focus on taking over the  administrative 
tasks relating to courts from the executive branch. The appointment process for the Supreme 
Court  was  marked  by  controversies  regarding  possible  undue  political  influence.  The 
digitalisation of justice has been further improved, particularly by making the new electronic 
communication e-Case portal operational. The Economic Court has made an effective start in 
the first  year of its operation. The plan to establish a new centralised training centre for the 
justice  system  is  advancing.  The  overall  efficiency  of  the  justice  system  remains  high,  and 
initiatives aim at improving it further.  

The  new  Action  Plan  to  prevent  corruption  is  pending  adoption.  Overall,  the  Corruption 
Prevention  and  Combating  Bureau  (KNAB)  deals  with  corruption  cases  efficiently  and 
progress has been acknowledged by the OECD regarding detection and prioritisation of cases 
of foreign bribery. The investigation and prosecution of corruption-related cases is carried out 
efficiently.  The  implementation  of  the  two-year  Action  Plan  addressing  the  State  Audit 
Office  recommendations  on  improving  the  quality  of  investigation  and  prosecution  of 
economic and financial crimes is expected to be completed within the deadline set for June 
2023. Draft legislation on lobbying is  being discussed and should be adopted in the second 
half  of  2022  along  with  a  creation  of  a  special  lobby  register.  New  legislation  on 
whistleblowing  was  adopted  on  20  January  2022.  Specific  anti-corruption  measures  were 
introduced  in  the  area  of  issuance  of  COVID-19  vaccination,  convalescence  or  testing 
certificates to combat the risk of fraud and corruption.  

The  legal  framework  for  media  pluralism  and  media  freedom  in  Latvia  safeguards  the 
fundamental  right  to  freedom  of  expression  and  information.  Media  authorities  continue  to 
function in an independent manner. The independence of the Latvian public service media is 
ensured  by  legal  and  structural  safeguards.  However,  concerns  remain  on  the  high  level  of 
media concentration. Journalists in  Latvia continue to work in a safe environment, although 
online threats remain an issue. At the end of 2021, Latvia started a mapping exercise based on 
the Commission’s Recommendation on ensuring the protection, safety and empowerment of 
journalists  and  other  media  professionals  in  the  European  Union,  to  define  the  institutions 
responsible for the various recommended actions and analyse the actions to pursue.  

The  state  of  emergency,  reinstated  for  several  months  to  address  the  COVID-19  pandemic, 
was lifted in March 2022. The appointment rules for the Ombudsperson were amended, and 
this  independent  authority  continued  playing  an  active  part  in  the  system  of  checks  and 
balances. Latvia continues to provide a favourable environment for the participation of civil 
society in decision-making and a new online single portal for participation of the public in the 
development  of  draft  legal  acts  became  operational.  An  action  plan  was  adopted  for  the 
implementation of the guidelines for the development of a cohesive and active civil society. 
Financial support to civil society organisations from the state budget increased in 2021, and 
the Ombudsperson’s office is looking into the reasons for weaker involvement of civil society 
in local government.  

1 

 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

In addition  to  recalling  the commitments made under the national  Recovery and Resilience 
Plan relating to certain aspects of the justice system, it is recommended to Latvia to:  

 

Initiate  a  process  in  view  of  ensuring  adequate  safeguards  against  undue  political 
influence  in  the  appointment  of  Supreme  Court  judges,  taking  into  account  European 
standards on judicial appointments. 

  Continue  efforts  towards  the  swift  adoption  and  effective  implementation  of  the  Action 

Plan 2021-2024 to prevent corruption. 

  Continue  efforts  towards  adopting  the  draft  legislation  on  lobbying,  and  following  that, 

ensure the setting-up of a special lobby register. 

  Take  measures  to  increase  the  participation  of  civil  society  in  decision-making  at  local 

level.  

2 

 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The Latvian justice system has three tiers. At first instance, there are nine district (city) courts 
dealing  with  civil  and  criminal  cases,  and  one  district  administrative  court.  The  Economic 
Court  deals  with  certain  economic  and  financial  crimes.  At  second  instance,  five  regional 
courts  are  dealing  with  civil  and  commercial  cases  and  there  is  one  regional  administrative 
court.  The  Supreme  Court,  at  third  instance,  is  handling  criminal,  civil  and  administrative 
cases.  The  Constitutional  Court  carries  out  constitutional  review.  An  independent  Judicial 
Council  is  tasked  with  participating  in  the  development  of  policies  and  strategies  for  the 
judicial system and the improvement of its organisation. Furthermore, the Council deals with 
selecting  candidate  judges,  appointing  and  dismissing  court  presidents,  determining  the 
judicial map and approving the content of training. Candidate judges are selected through an 
open competition organised by the Judicial Council, ranked and placed on a list, from which 
the  Minister  for  Justice  proposes  the  candidate  with  the  highest  number  of  points  to  the 
Parliament (Saeima) for appointment. After three years and an evaluation by a judicial body, 
judges are appointed for an indefinite term by the Parliament on a proposal from the Minister 
for Justice. The Prosecution Office is an independent judicial institution under the authority 
of  the  Prosecutor  General.  Latvia  participates  in  the  European  Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO). 
The Latvian Council of Lawyers is an independent, self-governing professional organisation, 
which is in charge of disciplinary proceedings regarding lawyers. 

Independence  

The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  in  Latvia  continues  to  be  average  among 
the  general  public  and  is  now  very  low  among  companies.  Overall,  53%  of  the  general 
population and 27% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to 
be ‘fairly or very good’ in 20221. According to data in the 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard, the 
level  slightly  decreased  since  2021  for  the  general  public  (from  56%),  but  decreased 
significantly  for  companies  from  53%  in  2021,  and  reached  its  lowest  level  since  2016  (it 
then stood at 35%). 

The Judicial Council amended the procedures for selecting candidate judges and court 
presidents.  The  procedure  for  selecting  candidate  judges  for  district  and  regional  courts, 
which had already been modified to strengthen judicial independence2, was further amended 
to improve the examination process by the Judicial Council. The new procedure, adopted by 
the Judicial Council on 21 October 2021, now comprises four rounds of candidate selection 
instead  of  five,  and  the  number  of  questions  has  been  increased  in  order  to  cover  a  wider 
range of expertise3. Furthermore, on 12 November 2021, following the Candidate Evaluation 
Commission’s4 proposals, the Judicial Council made amendments to the Selection procedure 

1   Figures 50 and 52, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents  perceive  judicial  independence  as  fairly  good  and  very 
good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 
2   The  competence  to  determine  the  procedure  was  transferred  in  2018  from  the  executive  to  the  Judicial 
Council. 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 2, and 2021 
Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 2. 

3   The  new  procedure  is  supplemented  with  the  condition  that  the  selection  process  is  organized  only  if  a 
former  judge  of  a  constitutional  court,  an  international  court  or  a  supranational  court  has  not  expressed  a 
wish to apply or has expressed a wish to apply, but has not received a successful assessment of the Selection 
Commission. 

4   The  Candidate  Evaluation  Commission  consists  of  two  judges  delegated  by  the  Judicial  Council,  an 
authorised representative of the Minister of Justice and a representative of the judges of the relevant court. 

3 

 
                                                 
for presidents of district courts as well as presidents and vice-presidents of regional courts5. 
Representatives  of  associations  of  judges  and  a  representative  of  the  Court  Administration 
may  participate  in  the  selection  process  in  an  advisory  capacity,  and  the  chairman  of  the 
Candidate Evaluation Commission may invite a competency assessment specialist to provide 
support in  evaluating the capabilities of candidates. Changes  were also  made to  the criteria 
for evaluating candidates6. 

The  Judicial  Council  started  implementing  its  strategy  for  2021-2025,  with  a  focus  on 
taking  over  the  administrative  tasks  relating  to  courts  from  the  executive  branch.  As 
stated in the 2021 Rule of Law Report, the overarching goal of this strategy is to increase the 
independence,  quality  and  accountability  of  the  justice  system7.  To  this  end,  one  of  the 
priorities of the Judicial Council is to take over the administrative management of the justice 
system  from  the  executive  branch8.  Representatives  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice  and  of  the 
Judicial  Council  are  in  discussions  to  implement  this  objective.  In  order  to  strengthen  the 
strategic role of the Judicial Council and to develop its administrative capacity, the number of 
employees of the Secretariat of the Judicial Council was increased from three to four in 2021. 
Strengthening the institutional capacity of the Judicial Council is also one of the priorities of 
the Supreme Court’s budget for 2022, which was endorsed by the Judicial Council9. 

The  appointment  process  for  the  Supreme  Court  was  marked  with  controversies 
regarding possible undue political influence. On 17 February 2022, Parliament rejected the 
candidacy of a former President of the Constitutional Court as judge of the Supreme Court10. 
According to the appointment rules, the Judicial Qualification Committee had evaluated the 
application  and  given  a  positive  opinion,  and  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
proposed  the  candidate  to  Parliament,  which  then  proceeded  to  vote.  Failing  to  reach  a 
majority  of  votes,  the  candidate  in  question  was  rejected.  Prior  to  the  vote,  a  number  of 
members of Parliament made statements criticising the candidate’s perceived political views 
in  relation  with  judgments  given  by  the  Constitutional  Court  under  her  tenure  as  its 
President11. This decision prompted criticism, including by the plenary of the Supreme Court, 
due  to  the  politicisation  of  the  appointment  process,  as  it  was  perceived  that  a  number  of 
deputies had based their decision on their disapproval with the content of judicial decisions, 
thus  undermining  judicial  independence12.  Under  the  Latvian  constitution,  there  is  no 

5   Decision No 77 of the Judicial Council of 12 November 2021. 
6   There  are  now  three  basic  criteria:  reputation  and  authority  in  the  court  system;  professional  competence; 

awareness of the functioning of the judicial system and vision of further development of the court.  

7   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 3. 
8   The  Court  Administration  is  currently  subordinated  to  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  which  also  decides  on 
budgetary  matters  for  all  courts  except  the  Supreme  Court.  In  May  2021,  the  University  of  Latvia’s 
department of anthropology conducted a survey on judicial independence on behalf of the Judicial Council, 
involving  335  judges,  thus  representing  61%  of  Latvia's  judges.  70.7%  of  the  respondents  indicated  that 
excessive  influence  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice  had  a  negative  impact  on  the  independence  of  the  judicial 
system. 

9   Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 4. 
10   Under Article 54(3) of the Law on Judicial Power, ‘A person who has been in the office of a Constitutional 
Court  judge,  a  judge  of  an  international  court  or  a  judge  of  a  supranational  court  and  has  received  a 
favourable opinion from the General Assembly of Judges of the department of the Supreme Court may apply 
for the office of a judge of the Supreme Court’. 

11   In  2020  and  2021,  the  Constitutional  Court  gave  several  judgments  reinforcing  the  rights  of  same-sex 
couples, in particular as regards the rights to benefit from parental leave and to inheritance. See Lsm.lv, 17 
February 2022, ‘Saeima rejects controversial Supreme Court candidate’.  

12   Decision No 2 of 18 February 2022 of the plenary of the Supreme Court ‘On the relationship between the 
legislature  and  the  judiciary  and  the  independence  of  the  judge’.  The  Supreme  Court  noted  that  the 

4 

 
                                                 
 
possibility to challenge in court the decision of the Parliament rejecting the candidacy13. This 
situation has revealed the vulnerability of the system of appointment to the Supreme Court to 
politicisation.  According to  European standards,  the appointment of judges should be made 
by an authority independent of the executive and legislative powers based on merit, having 
regard to the qualifications, skills and capacity required to adjudicate cases. Moreover, where 
the  appointing  authority  is  the  head  of  state,  the  government  or  the  legislative  power,  an 
independent  authority  drawn  in  substantial  part  from  the  judiciary  should  be  authorised  to 
make recommendations or express opinions followed in practice14. 

The  Supreme  Court  ruled  in  favour  of  the  rights  of  lawyers  to  access  information  in 
court proceedings to defend their clients, while access to State secrets may be refused if 
strictly necessary15. In a judgment of 16 July 202116, the Supreme Court held that lawyers 
belong to the justice system and that their participation in court proceedings is essential for 
ensuring the right to a fair trial. It found that, while access to State secrets may be objectively 
necessary for the performance of the duties of a lawyer, access to such materials may also be 
refused  to  a  lawyer,  if  strictly  necessary  in  the  light  of  public  interest,  such  as  national 
security.  Similarly,  in  a  judgment  of  21  October  202117,  the  Supreme  Court  confirmed  on 
appeal the right of lawyers to receive information from the State Revenue Service regarding a 
taxpayer to ensure the defence of a client in criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court upheld 
the findings that the sworn lawyer’s right and duty to ensure the defence of his or her client 
and the latter’s fundamental right to a fair trial should prevail over the taxpayer’s interest in 
protecting information about his (or her) private life18. 

Quality  

The  e-Case  Management  System  has  become  operational,  and  is  being  gradually 
extended to all courts. As stated in the 2021 Rule of Law Report, the aim of this new portal 
is to modernise the recording of procedural actions and the digitalisation of record-keeping19. 
On 1 December 2021, the necessary legislative amendments entered into force and the e-Case 

Parliament’s decision to deny a Constitutional Court judge the possibility of continuing his or her career on 
the basis of the outcome of a particular case infringes the Constitution, which prohibits penalising a judge as 
a  result  of  judgments  he  or  she  delivered,  unless  the  conditions  for  disciplinary  liability  are  met.  The 
Supreme  Court  added  that  the  vote  should  have  been  based  on  legal  considerations  and  the  principle  of 
professionalism,  and  called  upon  the  Parliament  to  observe  the  principles  of  separation  of  powers  and 
judicial independence. 

13   Figure 54, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
14   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, paras. 44-47.  
15   Contribution from the CCBE for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, pp. 40-41. 
16   Judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  (administrative  chamber)  of  16  July  2021,  Case  No  SA-1/2021, 

ECLI:LV:AT:2021:0716.SA000121.5.S. 

17   Judgment of the Supreme Court (administrative chamber) of 21 October 2021, Case No A420268820, SKA-

1038/2021, ECLI:LV:AT:2021:1021.A420268820.4.L. 

18   Article 455 of the Code of  Criminal Procedure provides rights to Advocates to request information for the 
purposes of gathering evidence necessary to ensure the defence of a client in criminal proceedings. The State 
Revenue Service had however relied, among others, on Article 22(1)  of the Law on Taxes and Fees, which 
provides that unless provided otherwise, an employee of the tax administration is prohibited from disclosing 
any information regarding a taxpayer without their consent, except for information regarding tax debts. The 
Supreme  Court  however  ruled  that  this  exception  is  not  applicable,  and  that  to  refuse  the  disclosure  of 
information, the State Revenue Service must establish that the interest for which the information is classified 
as restricted prevails over the interest of the person requesting the information.  

19   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, pp. 3-4. 

5 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
portal  became  operational20.  It  replaced  the  previous  digital  judicial  portal  and  ensures  the 
exchange of information between courts, the parties in  proceedings and judicial  authorities. 
The e-Case portal notably allows its various users21 to complete and submit electronic forms 
as  well  as  applications  to  the  courts,  consult  the  state  of  the  proceedings  and  the  judicial 
calendar. However, technical shortcomings were identified during the initial implementation 
phase of the  e-Case portal,  as  regards for instance the uploading  of  court documents22, and 
the Supreme Court issued an interpretation of the legislation allowing for the continued use of 
paper  files  to  prevent  these  issues  from  affecting  the  smooth  conduct  of  the  proceedings23. 
Moreover, it was reported that 43% of courts are currently equipped for videoconferencing, 
and  it  is  planned  to  equip  all  courtrooms  with  such  systems  by  the  end  of  202224.  The  full 
transition to electronic court cases should take place by 1 December 2023. As pointed out by 
the Ministry of Justice, it is crucial to provide all the necessary technical support to courts by 
this date and to continue to improve the Courts Information System25. In the second stage of 
implementation of the e-Case portal, from 2022 until 2026, it is planned to expand the range 
of  participating  institutions  and  integrate  their  information  systems  (e.g.  the  investigation 
authorities  and  Criminal  Procedure  Information  System)  as  well  as  to  integrate  the  e-
Evidence platform in the e-Case platform, specifically for European Investigation Orders and 
legal assistance requests26. An independent audit will be performed during the second stage 
of the e-Case portal. 

The  establishment  of  the  new  centralised  training  centre  for  the  justice  system  is 
advancing.  A  milestone  under  the  Latvian  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  (RRP)  requires 
Latvia to establish a Judicial Training Centre by 31 March 202527. The goal is to establish a 
unified  training  centre  for  the  development  of  qualifications  for  judges,  prosecutors  and 
investigators, in  cross-disciplinary matters that are essential for effective judicial reasoning, 
as the basis for a sustainable and stable system,  providing an opportunity for the long-term 
planning,  development  and  implementation  of  training  programmes.  In  order  to  effectively 
achieve  the  project  goals,  a  project  management  and  supervision  structure  has  been 
established and competencies have been defined. Work has begun on the project monitoring 

20   Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, pp. 3-4 and 6-7. 
21   The  portal  is  intended  among  others  for  parties  in  judicial  proceedings,  third  parties  involved  in  the 
proceedings,  sworn  advocates,  lawyers,  community  service  employers  and  workers,  judicial  experts,  state 
and local authorities as well as the general public. 

22   Further difficulties for the work of courts consisted in the limited functionality, insufficient performance and 
frequent failures of the record-keeping module, as well as issues performing searches in the electronic file. 
The operation of the portal is currently stabilized and shortcomings are detected less frequently. Information 
received from the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Court and the Association of Judges in the context of the 
country visit to Latvia. 

23   Decision No 2 of the plenary of the Supreme Court of 9 December 2021, ‘On ensuring the right to a fair trial 
and  uniform  case  law  in  the  context  of  digitalisation  of  court  work’.  The  Supreme  Court  noted  that  the 
judiciary had not been sufficiently involved in the development of the portal, and that the courts’ technical 
capacity  and  the  training  of  court  staff  were  not  adequate  yet  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the  e-Case  portal, 
which would therefore affect the right to a fair trial. 

24   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
25   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice following the country visit to Latvia. 
26   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice following the country visit to Latvia. 
27   On proposal from the Commission, the Council adopted the Implementing Decision of 16 July 2021 on the 
approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Latvia, under which the milestone no. 192 
states:  ‘Establishment of a  single training centre  for the  development of the qualifications of judges, court 
staff, prosecutors, assistant prosecutors and specialised investigators (interdisciplinary matters) requires the 
entry  into  force  of  the  regulatory  framework  for  the  operation  of  the  training  centre  and  public  funding 
ensured in state budget law for 2025 and 2026’. 

6 

 
                                                 
board,  project  management  committee,  project  implementation  team,  training  programme 
working  groups  and  project  advisory  board28.  On  18  June  2021,  the  Judicial  Council 
approved  the  institutional  model  proposed  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice  in  a  concept 
paper29. The  functional  model  provides  that  the  strategic  directions  of  the  activities  of  the 
training centre will be determined, supervised and evaluated by the Judicial Council, whereas 
the coordination of daily work will be entrusted to a Supervisory Board30. It is envisaged that 
the head of the centre will be appointed and removed from office by the Cabinet of Ministers 
upon the proposal of the Judicial Council. Work has also begun on planning content activities 
(training  events).  Negotiations  have  been  initiated  with  the  Prosecutor's  office  on  the 
development of curricula31. 

Efficiency 

The overall efficiency of the Latvian justice system remains high, and initiatives aim at 
improving  it  further.  The  length  of  court  proceedings  in  civil,  commercial  and 
administrative  cases,  measured  in  disposition  time,  showed  a  slight  increase,  but  remains 
average or shorter than average, in particular as regards administrative cases32. The number 
of pending cases remained stable and is still overall very low33. The clearance rate decreased 
slightly below 100%, except for administrative cases, where it remained above that threshold, 
indicating  that  courts  are  still  able  to  deal  steadily  with  incoming  cases  without  the  risk  of 
significant backlog34. There was a considerable improvement in the average length of judicial 
review regarding consumer protection at first instance, which dropped from 393 days in 2019 
to  141  days  in  202035,  while  it  remained  stable  as  regards  money  laundering  cases36.  To 
ensure  efficient  management  of  the  caseload  of  courts,  a  new  digital  tool,  ‘Portrait  of 
Courts’37,  was  developed  and  put  at  the  disposal  of  court  presidents.  It  provides  active 
strategic management of the daily work of courts and monitors trends in work indicators38, in 
order  to  proactively  address  potential  issues.  Moreover,  on  22  October  2021,  a  Working 
Group  for  Strengthening  the  Efficiency  of  the  Judiciary39  submitted  an  action  plan  to  the 
Judicial Council. Among the four priorities identified to improve the efficiency of courts, the 
working  group  recommended  balancing  the  workload  of  judges  and  optimising  the 
organisation of personnel in the court system. 

28   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice following the country visit to Latvia. 
29   Press  release  of  21  June  2021,  ‘The  Judicial  Council  supported  the  principles  set  out  in  the  concept  for 
setting up the training centre’. According to this concept  paper, the training centre will be established as a 
legal person governed by public law. 

30   A  newly created collegial institution consisting of representatives from courts,  the Prosecutor's Office, the 

Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Justice and academia. 

31   The establishment of the Judicial Training Center is planned in cooperation with the representatives of the 
Ministry  of  the  Interior,  the  State  Police  and  the  State  Police  College  in  order  to  avoid  duplication  in 
determining the topics, content and methods of interdisciplinary training. See written  contribution from the 
Ministry of Justice following the country visit to Latvia, p. 4. 

32   Figures 6-10, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
33   Figures 14-16, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
34   Figures 11-13, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
35   Figure 22, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
36   214 days in 2020, 212 days in 2019. Figure 24, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
37   Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 7. 
38   The  portal  contains  information  as  to  cases  received,  cases  adjudicated,  pending  cases  the  length  of  cases 

heard, stability indicators as well as the work of investigating judges.  

39   The  working  group  was  set  up  on  15  June  2021  to  achieve  the  goals  set  out  in  Axis  3  of  the  Judicial 
Council’s strategy for 2021-2025, entitled ‘Efficiency and Quality of the Justice System’. Input from Latvia 
for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 9. 

7 

 
                                                 
The  Economic  Court  has  dealt  efficiently  with  its  caseload  in  the  first  year  of  its 
operation. As mentioned in the 2021 Rule of Law Report40, the newly established Economic 
Court became operational on 31 March 2021, and is still functioning with 9 out of 10 judges 
currently appointed41. As of 1 February 2022, that Court had examined 42 criminal cases out 
of 103 lodged,  136  cases related to  criminally  acquired property out  of  194  lodged, and  47 
civil  cases  out  of  103  lodged  (29  of  which  were  declared  inadmissible)42,  showing  no 
particular difficulty in dealing with its caseload. Whereas no rapid increase of civil cases is 
expected,  the  number  of  criminal  cases  lodged  is  projected  to  double,  according  to  the 
announcements of the prosecution service43. One issue described by the Court as negatively 
affecting the average length of its proceedings is the impossibility to conduct remote hearings 
by videoconference for parties not residing in Latvia due to an interpretation of the law given 
by the Supreme Court44. An informative evaluation of the operations of the Economic Court 
was  conducted  in  2022,  and  the  evaluation  report  was  to  be  submitted  to  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers for examination on 1 April 2022. The information report is still in development. 

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The legislative and institutional framework to prevent and prosecute corruption is broadly in 
place. The Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau (KNAB) is a specialised body with 
competence  to  investigate  corruption-related  offences  and  prevent  corruption45.  The 
Prosecutor’s  Office  supervises  pre-trial 
investigations  of  corruption-related  offences 
conducted by the KNAB. Other institutions with anti-corruption competences are:  the State 
Police,  which  investigates  corruption  in  private  institutions  and  fraud;  the  Internal  Security 
Bureau, which investigates corruption-related criminal offences committed by the officials of 
the institutions subordinated to the Ministry of the Interior; the Internal Security Board of the 
State  Revenue  Service,  which  investigates  criminal  offences  committed  by  State  Revenue 
Service officials; and the State Border Guard, which investigates corruption involving State 
Border Guard's officers.  

The  perception  among  experts  and  the  business  community  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption  in  the  public  sector  remains  relatively  high.  In  the  2021  Corruption 
Perceptions Index by Transparency International, Latvia scores 59/100 and ranks 11th in the 
EU and 36th globally46. This perception has been relatively stable47 over the past five years48. 

40   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 5. 
41   At the time of this report, a competition is being organised to fill the remaining judge position. 
42   As  of  30  November  2021,  the  Economic  Court  had  solved  31  criminal  cases  out  of  73  lodged,  107  cases 
related to criminally acquired property out of 170 lodged, and 33 civil cases out of 89 lodged. Input from 
Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 8. 

43   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice following the country visit to Latvia, p. 5. 
44   Information received from the Economic Court in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
45   KNAB  competences  in  preventing  corruption  include  the  monitoring  of  conflicts  of  interest  and  political 
party  financing  (Including  the  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  the  Law  on  Financing  of  Political 
Organisations (Parties), amended in June 2020) as well as investigation of corruption-related offences. 

46   Transparency  International  (2022),  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2021,  pp.  2-3.  The  level  of  perceived 
corruption  is  categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public 
sector  corruption  scores  above  79);  relatively  low  (scores  between  79-60),  relatively  high  (scores  between 
59-50), high (scores below 50).  

47   In 2017, the score was 58, while, in 2021, the score is 59. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

8 

 
                                                 
The  2022  Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  78%  of  respondents  consider 
corruption  widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  68%)  and  22%  of  respondents  feel 
personally  affected  by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  24%)49.  As  regards 
businesses, 66% of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 
23%  consider  that  that  corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  34%)50. 
Furthermore, 22% of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter 
people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU  average  34%)51,  while  22%  of  companies  believe  that 
people  and  businesses  caught  for  bribing  a  senior  official  are  appropriately  punished  (EU 
average 29%)52. 

The  new  Action  Plan  to  prevent  corruption  is  pending  adoption.  The  draft  Corruption 
Prevention  and  Combating  Action  plan  2021-202453  was  submitted  by  KNAB  for 
consideration  at  the  1  July  2021  meeting  of  the  State  Secretaries.  It  was  consulted  with 
various Ministries and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Numerous suggestions are 
being currently considered. The Action Plan stipulates the following goals: (1) ensure human 
resources  management,  eliminating  corruptive  motivation;  (2)  improve  the  internal  anti-
corruption  control  system;  (3)  reduce  tolerance  of  corruption  in  society;  (4)  ensure  the 
inevitability of punishment for law violations; (5) limit the power of money in politics54. In 
terms  of  strengthening  the  fight  against  corruption,  the  implementation  of  the  Action  Plan 
should ensure that the delay in its adoption does not negatively impact completion of all the 
goals foreseen in it for the period 2021-202455.   

The reinforced Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau (KNAB) deals with the 
corruption  prevention  and  investigation  of  corruption-related  cases  efficiently.  KNAB 
was granted nine additional posts in 2021 and another 10 posts in 202256. The remuneration 
of its staff  was increased57. The KNAB continues monitoring conflicts  of  interest.  In 2021, 
KNAB took 256 decisions for violation of the Law on Prevention of Conflict of  Interest in 
Activities of Public Officials, for which fines were imposed on 222 public officials, for a total 
of EUR 40 36558. Also, KNAB initiated 118 administrative proceedings for violations of the 

48   The Eurobarometer data on corruption perception and experience of citizens and businesses as reported last 
year is updated every second year. The latest data set is the Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022) and the Flash 
Eurobarometer 507 (2022). 

49   Special  Eurobarometer  523  (2022).  The  Eurobarometer  data  on  citizens’  corruption  perception  and 
experience is updated every second year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 502 (2020). 
50   Flash  Eurobarometer  507  (2022).  The  Eurobarometer  data  on  business  attitudes  towards  corruption  as  is 

updated every second year. The previous data set is the Flash Eurobarometer 482 (2019). 

51   Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022).  
52   Flash Eurobarometer 507 (2022).  
53   Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 10. 
54   Draft Corruption Prevention and Combating Action plan 2021-2024. Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of 

Law Report, p. 10. 

55   Information received from Transparency International and Delna in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
56   As of 31 December 2021, 142 of 161 positions in KNAB were filled (19 vacant positions remain). KNAB 
employs  55  men,  and  87  women.  In  2021,  11  persons  began  their  service,  and  5  persons  terminated  their 
service in KNAB – Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, pp. 9-10. 

57   The plan was to align the salary conditions with those of other institutions and thus monthly remuneration of 
KNAB officials was to be raised by 21% in 2021, by 28% in 2022 and by 37% in 2023 (in comparison to 
2020). Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, and information received from the Ministry of 
Justice in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 

58   Based  on  the  aforementioned  decisions  taken  by  KNAB,  215  public  officials  paid  to  the  State  budget 
administrative  fines  for  a  total  of  EUR  37  345.  KNAB  took  21  decision  requesting  to  repay  losses  to  the 

9 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
 
Law  on  Financing  of  Political  Parties  and  Pre-election  Campaign  Law  in  2021,  against 
political  parties  and  other  legal  and  natural  persons,  taking  a  total  of  108  decisions.  As  a 
result of the investigations of corruption-related offences, KNAB imposed a total of EUR 16 
890 in fines, and six decisions on the repayment of financial resources to the State budget for 
a  total  of  EUR  18  112.7259.  In  terms  of  high-level  corruption  cases,  in  2021,  three  persons 
were  convicted  and  cases  against  four  legal  persons  were  sent  for  prosecution60.  In  2021, 
KNAB  carried  out  82  training  courses  for  over  10  000  participants  from  the  public  and 
private  sector  on,  inter  alia,  prevention  of  conflicts  of  interest,  professional  ethics  and 
fundamental  corruption  prevention  issues61.  KNAB  has  also  carried  out  a  social  campaign 
that aimed at promoting public involvement in reporting corruption and other latent crimes62.  

Investigation  and  prosecution  of  corruption-related  cases  is  carried  out  efficiently  by 
the  authorities.  Overall,  public  procurement  remains  the  main  area  at  high-risk  of 
corruption.  Latvia‘s  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  provides  for  the  entry  into  force  of 
regulatory  framework  for  improving  the  competition  environment  and  reducing  corruption 
risks in  public procurement  by  31 December 202163 The OECD acknowledged progress  on 
foreign bribery cases64 and use of the investigative techniques65. As reported by the Internal 
Security Bureau (ISB), in 2021, 23 investigations (out of 45) related to corruption were sent 
to the Prosecutor’s Office. Out of these 23 cases, 13 related to bribery66. In 2021, 10 criminal 
proceedings  were  initiated  by  the  State  Border  Guard  (SBG)  in  connection  with  corruption 
activities, nine criminal proceedings were sent to the Prosecutor's Office to initiate criminal 
prosecution.  Two  cases  concerned  bribery  in  relation  to  non-compliance  with  measures 
adopted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic67. Effective cooperation with the Financial 
Investigation  Units  in  an  investigation  concerning  foreign  bribery  led  to  confiscation  over 

State budget in the amount of EUR 29 506 for violations of the Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in 
Activities of Public Officials. Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 16. 

59   In  2021,  political  organisations  parties  and  other  legal  and  natural  persons,  pursuant  to  the  decisions  of 
KNAB,  repaid  to  the  State  budget  unlawfully  acquired  funding  for  a  total  of  EUR  94  602,  as  well  as 
voluntarily repaid a total of EUR 1 230, and a total of EUR 12 475 in fines. Input from Latvia for the 2022 
Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 

60   Information received from KNAB in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
61   Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 11. 
62   As  part  of  a  social  campaign  by  KNAB,  a  special  object  –  the  corruption  iceberg  –  was  placed  on  the 
Daugava river in Riga. It symbolised a small visible part of the iceberg of corruption, concealing below it a 
wide range of negative effects on both the actors involved in corruption and society as a whole. Input from 
Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 

63   On 13 July 2021, the Council adopted its Decision on the  approval of the assessment of the Recovery and 
Resilience  Plan  for  Latvia  (Council Implementing  Decision  of 13  July 2021 on  the  approval  of  the 
assessment  of  the  recovery  and  resilience  plan  for Latvia (2021/0164  (NLE)).  Milestone  no.  209  states: 
‘Entry into force of amendments to the public procurement law, including, inter alia, the following changes: 
1)  The  procurement  commission  shall  be  established  for  each  procurement  separately  or  for  a  specified 
period of time; 2) the secretary of the procurement commission shall sign a declaration of absence of conflict 
of  interest;  3)  broadened  cases  where  a  supplier  may  be  excluded  from  tender;  4)  the  evaluation  criteria 
identify  specific  areas  where  life-cycle  costs  and  quality  criteria  are  to  be  assessed  in  addition  to  the 
purchase  price;  5)  stricter  requirements  for  cases  with  only  a  single  bid;  6)  requirement  for  a  market 
consultation in order to avoid restrictive technical specifications’. 

64   As  indicated  in  the  2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  in  June  2019  the  Parliament  amended  the  Criminal  Law  to 
amend the definitions of several offences of the abuse of office, bribery and trading in influence. The new 
definitions of bribery and trading in influence eliminating  certain restrictions to the scope of deeds falling 
under the definition of these offences Amendments of the Criminal Law, 6 June 2019. 

65   OECD, Anti-Bribery Convention Latvia phase 3 two-year follow-up report. 
66   Written contribution from the Internal Security Bureau following the country visit to Latvia. 
67   Written contribution from the State Border Guard following the country visit to Latvia. 

10 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
EUR  5  million68.  The  majority  of  investigations  on  corruption  concern  abuse  of  official 
authority  while  bribery  cases  and  penalties  are  relatively  low.  According  to  the  Economic 
Court, corruption cases represent a small number of the overall workload (15 out of 300 cases 
in 2021; currently three cases still pending)69. Overall, good cooperation between the relevant 
authorities was confirmed by all parties70.  

The Prosecutor General’s Office has well advanced on the implementation of the action 
plan  addressing  the  State  Audit  Office  recommendations  on  improving  the  quality  of 
investigation  and  prosecution  of  economic  and  financial  crimes.  There  is  significant 
progress as regards follow-up to the results of its performance review on the effectiveness of 
investigations and trials of the criminal offences in the economic and financial area71, carried 
out by the State Audit Office in December 2020, and a two-year action plan72 of April 2021 
addressing  those  recommendations.  The  implementation  of  all  twenty  recommendations  is 
well-advanced and is expected to be finalised by June 202373. The progress includes, amongst 
others,  new  strategies  concerning  the  handling  of  cases,  the  reorganisation  of  several  units, 
the  merger  of  some  district  units,  creation  of  guidelines  on  sharing  competences  between 
prosecutors  and  further  digitalisation  of  criminal  proceedings.  Two  specialised  units  were 
created, one focusing on offences within the state authorities and one on tax offences attached 
to State Revenue Service (SRS) which is  likely  to ensure closer cooperation between those 
services74. 

While the system on asset declarations works well, it  requires more transparency. The 
2021  amendments  to  the  Law  on  Prevention  of  Conflict  of  Interest  in  Activities  of  Public 
Officials,  which  clarify,  among  others  the  definition  of  relatives  of  a  public  official  and 
impose the duty on public officials to report any known alleged corruption cases, entered into 
force  on  2  February  2021.  Their  impact  remains  to  be  assessed.  In  accordance  with  the 
legislation  in  force75,  all  declarations  of  public  officials  electronically  submitted  are 
automatically verified in the Payment Administration Information System (MAIS) comparing 
their  information  with  the  information  in  disposal  of  the  SRS.  This  system  has  proved 
effective according to  the SRS76. Currently efforts are made on the preventive side, namely 
through training courses concerning asset declarations. In order to further clarify and update 
the  rules  in  place,  it  is  necessary  to  further  improve  the  legal  framework77.  As  regards  the 
asset  declarations  in  2021,  the  SRS  took  302  decisions  concerning  declarations  on  non-

68   Information received from KNAB in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
69   Information received from the Economic Court in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
70   Information  received  from  KNAB,  the  State  Border  Guard,  the  Prosecution  General’s  Office  and  the 

Economic Court in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 

71   State  Audit  Office  (2020),  Performance  audit  Effectiveness  of  investigations  and  trials  of  the  criminal 
offences in the economic and financial area. The audit was conducted in cooperation with the Organization 
for  Economic  Cooperation  and  Development  (OECD),  which  provided  comparative  information  on 
organisation  of  prosecution  services  in  selected  countries.  OECD  (2021),  Performance  of  the  Prosecution 
Services in Latvia - A Comparative Study.  

72   State  Audit  Office  (2021),  Press  release:  Plan  to  implement  the  SAO’s  recommendations  for  streamlining 

prosecution of economic and financial crimes. 

73   Information received from the State Audit Office in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
74   Information received from State Revenue Service in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
75   Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Public Officials and Cabinet Regulation No. 478 ‘Procedure for 
Completion, Submission, Registration and Keeping of Declarations of Public Officials and for Drawing up 
and Submission of Lists of Persons Holding the Office of a Public Official’. 

76   Information received from State Revenue Service in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
77   Information received from the State Revenue Service in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 

11 

 
                                                 
compliance,  no  case  resulted  in  the  opening  of  criminal  proceedings  in  2021  (compared  to 
eight in 2020)78. Restrictions on post-employment remain unchanged since the 2021 Rule of 
Law Report79. 

The  draft  legislation  on  lobbying  remains  under  consideration  in  Parliament.  NGOs 
have showed considerable efforts to encourage the Parliament and the Government to prepare 
the law to regulate lobbying based on principles agreed in 202180. The draft law passed the 
first reading in the Parliament in February 2022 and is expected to be adopted by the end of 
the  current  Parliament’s  mandate,  namely  October  202281.  The  objective  of  increasing 
transparency is to be achieved through, among others, a creation of a special lobby register 
(probably as part of the Enterprise Register of the Republic of Latvia)82. The entry into force 
is  currently  planned  for  2023,  which  could  be  challenging  as  only  a  short  timeframe  is 
foreseen for the creation of the mentioned register.  

New amendments on political party financing aiming at regulation of the allocation of 
state budget funding were adopted. On 24 February 2022 amendments were adopted in the 
Law  on  Financing  of  Political  Organizations  (Parties)  and  they  will  enter  into  force  on  1 
November 202283. The amendments changed Section 7(1) of the Law, which provides for the 
State  budget  financing  to  a  political  party.  The  aim  of  amendments  is  to  improve  the 
regulation  of  the  allocation  of  State  budget  funding  to  political  parties  by  setting  certain 
model of action in cases where a parliamentary  group of a political party in Parliament has 
ceased  to  exist  or  collapsed.  The  amendments  are  expected  to  promote  the  stability  and 
parliamentary  efficiency  of  political  parties  by  allowing  only  those  political  parties,  whose 
parliamentary  group  continue  their  work  and  have  not  collapsed  after  the  Parliament 
elections, to receive the State budget funding84. 

New legislation on whistleblowing was adopted. The Whistleblowing Law was adopted on 
20  January  2022  and  entered  into  force  on  4  February  202285.  Its  main  aim  is  to  align  the 
national legislation to the Whisteblowers Directive86, while it did not significantly change the 
current  system  as  laid  down  in  2019  legislation.  It  mainly  expands  the  previous  list  of 
reportable  issues87  from  15  to  22.  According  to  the  State  Chancellery,  which  is  the  contact 
point  for  whistleblowers88,  corruption  is  the  main  violation  reported89.  The  number  of 

78   Information received from State Revenue Service in the context of the county visit to Latvia. Information on 
the  State  Revenue  Service  online  database  at: 

is  publicly  available  on 

asset  declarations 
https://www6.vid.gov.lv/VAD.  

79   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 9. 
80   Input from Latvia for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. 
81   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
82   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
83   Amendments to the  Law on  Financing of Political Organizations (Parties) of 19 July 1995, adopted on 24 

February 2022. 

84   At  the  same  time,  the  amendments  provide  that  the  Corruption  Prevention  and  Combating  Bureau,  after 
receiving  information  from  the  Saeima,  shall  make  a  decision  to  terminate  the  payment  of  state  budget 
funding referred to in Section 7(1) paragraph one, point 1 of this Law if: 1) the activities of a parliamentary 
group of a political organization (party) established in the Saeima are terminated; 2) the number of deputies 
of a parliamentary group of a political organization (party) established in the Saeima, decreases by more than 
two thirds. Written contribution received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit  to 
Latvia.  

85   Whistleblowing Law, adopted on 20 January 2022. 
86   Transposing Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union Law. 
87   Section 3 of the 2019 Whistleblowing Law. 
88   Article 8 of the new Whistleblowing Law. 

12 

 
                                                 
whistleblowers submissions is reported to be relatively stable, with a tendency to increase90. 
In  2021,  the  total  number  of  submissions  received  by  the  State  Chancellery  in  form  of 
whistleblowers reports was 527, from which 153 were recognised as such (in parallel, KNAB 
received  a  total  of  63  submissions  in  form  of  whistleblowers  reports,  from  which  53  were 
recognised  as  such)91.  The  current  framework  on  whistleblowing  is  considered  effective 
while various awareness-raising activities are conducted in this area92. 

Specific anti-corruption measures were introduced in the area of issuance of COVID-19 
vaccination, convalescence or testing certificates due to high susceptibility to fraud and 
corruption.  On  11  November  2021,  the  Parliament  adopted  amendments93  to  the  Criminal 
Law  specifically  criminalising  the  acquisition  of  forged  COVID-19  vaccination,  testing  or 
recovery  certificates,  as  well  as  providing  an  exemption  for  persons  voluntarily  reporting 
such  actions  post-factum  and  actively  facilitating  the  detection  and  investigation  of  the 
criminal  offence94.  The  amendments  entered  into  force  on  14  November  2021  and  their 
impact  remains  to  be  assessed.  The  Economic  Crimes  Department  of  the  Central  Criminal 
Police Department of the State Police unit has been actively involved in the investigation of 
medical  staff  for  issuing  fake  COVID-19  vaccination  certificates.  Overall,  three  criminal 
cases  were  sent  to  prosecution,  69  criminal  proceedings  on  fake  vaccination  COVID-19 
vaccination certificates have been initiated in the State Police, four criminal proceedings have 
been initiated, 64 illegal vaccination certificates have been revoked95. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

In  Latvia, the legal  framework  concerning media pluralism  and media freedom  is  based on 
constitutional safeguards and sectorial legislation. The Constitution prohibits censorship and 
guarantees  freedom  of  expression  and  information.  The  Law  on  the  Press  and  Other  Mass 
Media prohibits monopolisation of the press and other mass media. The Law also establishes 
the right for the press to access information held by the state bodies and public organisations 
and prohibits censorship. Public access to information is also guaranteed by the Freedom of 
Information  Law96.  The  Electronic  Mass  Media  Law  (EMML)  is  the  main  media  law. 
Legislation to transpose the Audiovisual Media Services Directive has been adopted97.  

89   Information received from State Chancellery in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
90   Statistics:  449  submissions  in  2019  (8  months),  556  submissions  in  2020  and  527  submissions  in  2021. 

Written contribution received from the State Chancellery in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 

91   State 

Chancellery’s 

Annual 

Report 

2021, 

pp. 

5, 

7, 

8: 

https://www.trauksmescelejs.lv/sites/default/files/buttons-card-
files/Trauksmes_celejs_2021_parskats_web_final.pdf 

92   Its  second  social  campaign  was  carried  out  in  December  2020  and  January  2021,  explaining  the  nature, 
system  and  possibilities  of  whistleblowing.  Additionally,  the  State  Chancellery  conducted  a  three-webinar 
cycle  on  various  whistleblowing  issues.  Results  of  whistleblowing  report  examinations,  reports  in  the 
competence  of  multiple  institutions,  internal  whistleblowing  –  trust  and  encouragement  (on  3/12/2021). 
Signs  of  whistleblowing,  recognizing  whistle-blower  reports  and  effective  examination  thereof  (on 
21/10/2021). Whistleblowing – is protection guaranteed? (on 24/10/2021). 

93   Sections 275.2 and 275.3 were added to the Criminal Law. 
94   Sections 2752 (Obtaining and storing a forged interoperable certificate) and 2753 (Exemption from criminal 
liability of the holder, custodian and user of a forged interoperable certificate) were added to the Criminal 
Law. 

95   Written contribution from the State Police following the country visit to Latvia. 
96   Freedom of Information Law. 
97   Complete transposition of the AVMSD was notified to the Commission on 20 December 2020. Latvia ranks 
22nd in the 2022 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index compared to 22nd in the previous 
year. 

13 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
Latvia has in place regulatory safeguards for the independence of the media regulator98. 
The  independent  media  regulator,  the  National  Electronic  Mass  Media  Council  (NEMMC), 
has  an  obligation  to  act  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the  Latvian  Constitution. 
When acting in its decision-making capacity, the NEMMC must not request and receive any 
instructions from any other institution.  

There have been no changes in the legal framework concerning transparency of media 
ownership99.  There  are  no  obligations  for  media  companies  to  disclose  their  ownership 
structures directly to the general public. However, the public retains the possibility to obtain 
such information from the Registers of Enterprises and the website of the National Electronic 
Mass  Media  Council.  As  described  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report100,  following  the 
amendment  to  the  EMLL,  all  companies  registered  in  Latvia,  including  media  outlets,  are 
obliged to provide the information on their beneficial owners to the Register of Enterprises, 
and  service  providers  are  obliged  to  provide  information  on  their  beneficial  owners  or  any 
changes  thereto  to  the  National  Electronic  Mass  Media  Council.  Latvia's  National  Open 
Government Action Plan for 2022-2025 sets out a commitment (activity 5.3. sub-point - c) to 
promote the availability of information on media ownership to the public101. 

Concerns remain on the high level of media concentration. Abuse of a dominant position 
of an electronic mass media is prohibited. When the market share of an electronic mass media 
in  a  particular  market  exceeds  35%,  it  is  considered  to  amount  to  a  dominant  position. 
However,  the  assessment  of  dominant  position  is  provided  only  in  case  of  merger  of 
companies  and  there  are  no  restrictions  on  horizontal  or  cross  media  concentration.  The 
Media Pluralism Monitor indicators of news media concentration and platform concentration 
continue  to  register  a  high  risk102.  Concerning  operating  licensing,  broadcasting  rights  are 
granted on the basis of an application submitted to the NEMMC103. If a broadcaster requires 
the  resource  of  radio  frequencies,  the  broadcasting  rights  are  awarded  through  a  tender 
procedure.  The  basic  criteria  for  the  evaluation  are  the  creative,  financial  and  technical 
provisions  of  a  broadcaster's  concept  and  the  amount  of  the  state  language  used  during  the 
broadcasting  period.  Upon  payment  of  a  state  fee,  a  broadcasting  permit  is  issued  to  the 
winner of the tender for 10 years. 

The  new  supervisory  body  for  public  service  media  has  become  operational.  The  new 
body  –  the  Public  Electronic  Mass  Media  Council  (PEMMC)  –  established  by  the  Law  on 
Public  Electronic  Mass  Media  and  their  Management  (PEMML)  in  2020104  to  enhance  the 
independence  of  public  service  media,  has  become  operational  and  its  three  members  were 
appointed  by  the  Parliament  in  August  2021105.  The  PEMMC  shares  with  the  Public 
Electronic Mass Media Ombudsman, appointed in December 2021, the functions previously 
attributed  to  NEMMC  as  regards  the  operational  oversight  of  public  service  media.  It 
guarantees the editorial independence of public service media and develops and approves the 
public service remit. The PEMML provides specific safeguards to ensure the independence of 

98   Act amending the Electronic Mass Media Law, adopted on 5 November 2020. 
99   Act amending the Electronic Mass Media Law, adopted on 11 June 2020. 
100  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 11. 
101  https://likumi.lv/ta/id/329905-par-latvijas-piekto-nacionalo-atvertas-parvaldibas-ricibas-planu-20222025-

gadam?&search=on 

102  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, Latvia, p. 12. 
103  Article 15 of the Electronic Mass Media Law. 
104  Law on Public Electronic Mass Media and their Management (LPEMMM), adopted on 19 November 2020. 
105  Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 

14 

 
                                                 
the  PEMMC  thanks  to  transparent  procedures  and  appointment  process106.  The  MPM  2022 
indicates a low risk for the independence of the media authorities107. 

Legal  safeguards  protect  the  independence  of  Latvian  public  service  media.  The 
PEMML provides specific safeguards for the independence of public service media (LTV)108. 
According  to  the  Law  on  Public  Broadcasting,  public  service  media  must  be  free  from 
political,  economic,  or  other  interference  with  their  activities.  The  PEMML  stipulates  that 
LTV is a limited liability company where all capital shares are owned by the state. The newly 
created PEMMC is the holder of the state capital shares in public media. The PEMML also 
provides  for  a  new  procedure  to  appoint  the  public  media  board  and  editor-in-chief.  The 
election of the members of the board of the public service media and of the editor in chief is 
entrusted  to  the  PEMMC.  The  board  comprises  a  maximum  of  three  members  who  are  not 
entitled  to  use  their  powers  to  directly  or  indirectly  influence  editorial  decisions.  The 
members of the board cannot  be active in  political  parties and cannot  be removed from  the 
office  before  the  end  of  the  term,  save  for  the  limited  grounds  specified  in  the  Law.  The 
editors in-chief of the public service media are approved by the PEMMC for a term of five 
years.  They  must  be  independent  from  the  board  in  taking  editorial  decisions  and  can  be 
dismissed  only  by  the  two  thirds  of  the  members  of  the  PEMMC.  LTV’s  annual  report  is 
prepared by the board and submitted for approval  to  the PEMMC.  LTV is  funded annually 
from the state budget. In line with the guidelines for the operation of the public media outside 
the advertising market, issued by the NEPLP, as of January 2021 LTV exited the advertising 
market109. The MPM 2022 rates the independence of public service media at low risk110.  

Journalists in Latvia continue to work in an overall safe environment, although threats 
in the online environment remain an issue. Since the 2021 Rule of Law Report, one alert 
has been published for Latvia111. Nevertheless, the threats against journalists, in particular in 
the online environment, remain an issue112. In light of the Commission’s Recommendation on 
ensuring the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists and other media professionals 
in the European Union, at the end of 2021 Latvia started a mapping exercise to determine the 
institutions which will be responsible for the various recommended actions, followed by an 
analysis of the actions still to be taken113. The Latvian Government allocated around EUR 3.2 
million to the media sector in 2021 to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the 
media114. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Latvia is a unicameral, parliamentary democracy, in which the Constitutional Court can carry 
out  ex-post  constitutional  review  of  laws,  including  in  concrete  cases  on  the  basis  of  a 
constitutional complaint. Draft laws may be submitted to the Parliament by the President, the 
Government, Parliamentary committees, at least five members of the Parliament, or one-tenth 

106  Article 12 and Aricle 13 of the Law on Public Electronic Mass Media and their Management (LPEMMM). 
107  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, Latvia, p. 11. 
108  Article 3 of the Law on Public Electronic Mass Media and their Management (LPEMMM). 
109  Information  received  from  the  Latvian  Public  Service  Media  (LTV)  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to 

Latvia. 

110  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, Latvia, p. 17. 
111  On the Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists.  
112  Information received from the Latvian Association of Journalists in the context of the country visit to Latvia. 
113  Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 
114  Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 

15 

 
                                                 
of the electorate. In addition to the justice system, also the Ombudsperson’s Office, acting as 
a national human rights institution, and civil society play a role in the system of checks and 
balances.  

The development of draft legal acts and the participation of the public are facilitated by 
a  new  online  single  portal.  On  7  September  2021,  the  Cabinet  of  Ministers  amended  its 
Rules of Procedure115, which now provide for the drafting of legal acts and the conduct and 
public  consultations  through  a  Single  Portal  for  Drafting  and  Harmonising  Legislation  (the 
‘TAP  portal’)116.  The  aim  of  this  new  portal,  among  others,  is  to  provide  more  accessible 
public participation and a more efficient and swifter process for developing and harmonising 
draft  legal  acts.  The  TAP  portal  functions  as  an  informational  database  on  pending  and 
previous  governmental  decisions,  providing  unified  electronic  access  to  all  draft  laws  and 
regulations,  including  their  content,  progress,  as  well  as  related  stakeholder  and  public 
opinions.  The  TAP  portal  also  provides  a  technical  solution  to  various  forms  of  public 
participation, such as surveys, discussions, advisory councils, working groups and opinions. 
The Latvian Civic Alliance, an umbrella organisation of Latvian NGOs, criticised the process 
of drafting the new rules of procedure of the Cabinet of Ministers without consulting the civil 
society,  and  argued  that  the  amendments  would  negatively  affect  the  participation  of  civil 
society in the decision-making process117. Following the concerns expressed, the government 
decided to maintain the previous practice and agreed to a one-month transition period for the 
submission of legislative proposals by the civil society not only through the new TAP portal, 
but also through regular mail or e-mail118. 

The  state  of  emergency,  reinstated  for  several  months  to  address  the  COVID-19 
pandemic, was  lifted on 1 March 2022, and courts reviewed emergency measures. The 
government  reintroduced  a  state  of  emergency119,  providing  for  a variety  of  restrictions, 
initially for three months as of 11 October 2021, and then extended until 28 February 2022. 
The  Cabinet  of  Ministers  also  adopted  a  new  Regulation120  on  Epidemiological  Safety 
Measures  in  September  2021.  Measures  adopted  as  a  response  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic 
were  challenged  before  the  courts,  including  five  cases  lodged  before  the  Constitutional 
Court in 2021 challenging the constitutionality of the Law on the Management of the Spread 
of Infection with COVID-19 and the successive versions of the Regulation of the Cabinet of 
Ministers of 9 June 2020 on Epidemiological  Safety  Measures.  In  a judgment of 10  March 
2022121, the Constitutional Court found the Regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers restricting 

115  Cabinet  Regulation  No.606  of  7  September  2021  amending  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  Cabinet  of 

Ministers. 

116  Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 11. 
117  The concerns stemmed from the fact that initially, the amendments did not foresee any transition period for 
the introduction of a common portal for the development of draft laws, on the one  hand, and excluded the 
representatives of NGOs from attending the meetings of State Secretaries and of the Cabinet of Ministers, on 
the other hand. Latvian Civic Alliance (2021), press release of 20 August 2021, ‘Latvian Civic Alliance calls 
on the Cabinet of Ministers to prevent a reduction in opportunities for public involvement’.  

118  Latvian  Civic  Alliance  (2021),  press  release  of  3  September  2021,  ‘Decision  to  maintain  the  current 
participatory  practice’.  See  also  Franet  (2022),  Country  research  –  Legal  environment  and  space  of  civil 
society organisations in supporting fundamental rights – Latvia, p. 4. 

119  By Order No. 720 of 9 October 2021. 
120  Regulation  No.  662  on  Epidemiological  Safety  Measures  for  the  Containment  of  the  Spread  of  Covid-19 

Infection. 

121  Judgment  of  the  Constitutional  Court  of  10  March  2022, No.  2021-24-03 on  the  compliance  of  paragraph 
24 of Regulation No. 662 of the Cabinet of Ministers, of 9 June 2020, on Epidemiological Safety Measures 
for the Containment of the Spread of Covid-19 Infection (in the wording in force from 7 April 2021 to 19 

16 

 
                                                 
 
the operations of larger shopping malls unconstitutional, on the grounds that it infringed the 
fundamental  right  to  property  and  the  principle  of  equal  treatment122.  The  administrative 
district  court  also  received  over  200  applications,  some  of  which  are  currently  pending, 
challenging  the  compulsory  COVID-19  vaccination  for  certain  sectors  such  as  education, 
health and social care123. 

On 1 January 2022, Latvia had 7 leading judgments of the European Court of Human 
Rights pending implementation124. At that time, Latvia’s rate of leading judgments from the 
past  10  years  that  remained  pending  was  only  at  12%  and  judgments  had  been  pending 
implementation for 1 year and 5 months on average125. The oldest leading judgment, pending 
implementation  for  3  years,  concerns  a  blanket  ban  on  prison  leave  for  male  prisoners  in 
closed prisons126. On 1 July 2022, the number of leading judgments pending implementation 
remains 7127. 

The rules to appoint the Ombudsperson were amended, and this independent authority 
continues to play an active part in the system of checks and balances. The amendments to 
the Ombudsperson Law adopted in 2021 entered into force on 1 January 2022. As mentioned 
in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report128,  following  recommendations  by  the  Global  Alliance  of 
National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (GANHRI)  Sub-Committee  on  Accreditations,  the  law 
now  provides  that  the  candidate  for  the  position of  Ombudsperson  is  nominated  by  no  less 
than  ten  members  of  Parliament,  instead  of  five;  the  same  person  may  serve  as  an 
Ombudsperson for a maximum of two consecutive terms, whereas the number of terms was 
previously unlimited. The Ombudsperson’s Office129 continued making use of its competence 
to  challenge  the  constitutionality  of  laws  to  defend  the  rights  of  citizens,  and  the 
Constitutional Court upheld such a challenge130 against the rules outlining the procedure for 
determining  the  income  subject  to  personal  income  tax  for  economic  operators.  The 
Ombudsperson’s  Office  also  continued  to  monitor  the  impact  laws  and  governmental 
measures,  including  those  taken  in  the  context  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  had  on  human 

May 2021) with the first sentence of Article 91 and the first and third sentences of Article 105 of the Latvian 
Constitution. 

122  The  Constitutional  Court  noted  that  the  Regulation  did  not  consider  the  possibility  of  providing  separate 
external access to certain stores of large commercial centers, whereas shops located in separate spaces could 
continue their activities in accordance with the epidemiological safety requirements, thus creating a differing 
treatment between traders. 

123  See Baltic News Network, 10 December 2021, ‘Court rejects complain from several judges on compulsory 

Covid-19 vaccination’. 

124  The adoption of necessary execution  measures  for  a judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 
cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

125  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases 
that  are  considered  pending  at  the  annual  cut-off  date  of  1  January  2022.  See  the  contribution  from  the 
European Implementation Network for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 54.  

126  Judgment of the European  Court of Human Rights of  10  January 2019,  Ecis v. Latvia, 12879/09, pending 

implementation since 2019. 

127 Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
128  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 13. 
129  The Latvian Ombudsperson’s Office is a national human rights institution accredited with an “A Status” by 

the GANHRI Sub-Committee on Accreditations, in compliance with the Paris Principles. 

130  By judgment of 7 January 2022. 

17 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
rights.  In  November  2021,  the  Ombudsperson  asked  the  Ministry  of  Welfare  for  urgent 
information about the progress made on the amendments to the Law on the Management of 
the  Spread  of  Infection  with  COVID-19,  and  repeatedly  called  for  the  elimination  of  the 
unequal treatment of people under international protection such as the elderly or people with 
disabilities131. 

An  action  plan  was  adopted  for  the  implementation  of  the  guidelines  for  the 
development  of  a  cohesive  and  active  civil  society  2021-2027.  The  civic  space  in  Latvia 
continues  to  be  considered  as  narrowed132.  By  order  of  18  January  2022,  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers  adopted  an  action  plan  for  2022-2023,  designating  the  Ministry  of  Culture  as  the 
main  responsible  institution  for  the  implementation  of  the  plan.  One  of  the  three  lines  of 
action aims  to  strengthen civil  society by fostering a civic culture and developing inclusive 
citizenship,  in  particular  by  increasing  public  participation  and  the  ability  of  citizens  to 
influence  policies  decision  making.  133.According  to  the  plan,  the  development  of  media 
literacy and digital skills is described as a priority, since much of the information space has 
moved  to  the  digital  environment,  especially  during  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  and  public 
participation increasingly takes place online through interactive digital platforms. The action 
plan commits the government to organise think tanks and fora for participation issues every 
year,  as  well  as  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  the  cooperation  memorandum  between  the 
council of NGOs and the Cabinet of Ministers. 

Financial support to civil society organisations from the state budget increased in 2021, 
and  the  Ombudsperson’s  office  is  looking  into  the  reasons  for  weaker  involvement  of 
civil  society  in  local  government.  Under  the  framework  of  the  State  budget  programme 
‘NGO  fund’134,  87  civil  society  projects  in  the  areas  of  strengthening  the  capacity  of  civil 
society  organisations  (CSOs),  the  protection  of  interests,  and  civil  society  activities  were 
funded in 2021, for a total amount of available funding of EUR 1.5 million.  The number of 
CSOs that have received funding from the NGO fund has increased from 70 in 2020 to 87 in 
2021, and the total funding available increased to EUR 1.8 million for projects to be funded 
in  2022135.  According  to  the  Ombudsperson’s  office,  CSOs  in  Latvia  are  actively 
participating  in  the  legislative  process,  regularly  attending  meetings  of  the  parliamentary 
committees  and  are  thus  given  an  opportunity  to  make  their  position  known  on  draft 
legislation.  However,  there  are  concerns  that  the  participation  and  involvement  of  CSOs  in 
decision-making  is  weaker  at  local  than  at  national  level,  and  one  of  the  priorities  of  the 
Ombudsperson’s  office  for  2022  is  to  study  the  cause  of  this  discrepancy136.  One  of  the 
factors  described  as  inhibiting  public  participation  in  local  government  is  the  lack  of 

131  Ombudsperson’s Office, November 2021 Monthly News Summary, 5 December 2021. 
132  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Latvia, p. 13. See also rating given 
by  Civicus,  Latvia.  Ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed,  obstructed,  repressed 
and closed. 

133  Action  Plan,  point  2.2.,  ‘Strengthen  the  development  and  sustainability  of  civil  society  by  creating  a  civil 

culture and developing inclusive citizenship’. 

134  In the action plan for the implementation of the guidelines for the development of a cohesive and active civil 
society  2021-2027,  the  NGO  fund  is  described  as  one  of  the  most  important  financial  instruments  for 
promoting  the  public  involvement  of  civil  society,  as  it  provides  NGOs  opportunities  to  strengthen  their 
capacity, participate in advocacy and ensure the implementation of measures important for the development 
of civil society. 

135  Franet (2022), Country research – Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting 

fundamental rights – Latvia, p. 3. 

136  Some of the causes advanced are the weaker capacity of CSOs at local level and a limited support for CSOs 

from local government. See contribution from ENNHRI for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 376.  

18 

 
                                                 
obligation of municipalities to  publish information on their meetings137, such as minutes or 
recordings, in a form, which would enable stakeholders such as CSOs to take part actively in 
the  decision-making  process138.  Similarly,  it  is  reported  that  municipalities  in  Latvia  rarely 
provide  an  archive  of  information  about  former  councillors  or  previous  compositions  of 
committees,  which  makes  it  difficult  for  citizens  or  entrepreneurs  to  easily  identify 
responsible decision-makers over time139.  

137  Transparency  International  Latvia  in  cooperation  with  Transparency  International  Norway  (2021), 
Transparency  Index  of  Local  Authorities,  p.  12  (Annex  I).  The  study  indicates  that  only  one  Latvian 
municipality  went  beyond  its  legal  obligations  as  regards  transparency,  by  publishing  minutes  and 
recordings of council meetings reflecting relevant information in a user-friendly form. 

138  In  one  specific  case,  the  Ombudsperson  pointed  out  that  the  practice  of  reading  out  audio  recordings  he 
reports  of  the  previous  city  council  meetings  before  decision-making  had  become  purely  formal,  as 
recordings had become generalised and did not reflect the assessment and justification of the decisions taken. 
See Ombudsperson’s Office (2022), 2021 Report, p. 189 (Annex I).  

139  Ombudsperson’s Office (2022), 2021 Report, p. 189 (Annex I). 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2022 Rule of Law report 
can  be  found  at  https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2022-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-
consultation_en. 

Association of Judges (2022), Contribution from the Association of Judges for the 2022 Rule of Law 
Report. 

Baltic News Network (2021), ‘Court rejects complain from several judges on compulsory Covid-19 
vaccination’,  10  December  2021  https://bnn-news.com/court-rejects-complain-from-several-judges-
on-compulsory-covid-19-vaccination-230796. 

Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2022),  Media  pluralism  monitor  2022  –  country 
report on Latvia. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Latvia https://monitor.civicus.org/country/latvia/.  

Constitutional  Court 
https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/2021_24_03_Spriedums.pdf. 

(2022),  Judgment  of  10  March  2022 

in  case  No. 2021-24-03 

Corruption  Prevention  and  Combating  Bureau  (KNAB)  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Corruption 
Prevention and Combating Bureau for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (2022), Contribution from the Council of Bars and Law 
Societies of Europe (CCBE) for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists - Latvia 
https://fom.coe.int/en/pays/detail/11709534.  

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. 

Council of the European Union (2021) Council Implementing Decision of 6 July 2021 on the approval 
of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Latvia, and Annex. 

Delna (2022), Contribution from Delna for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of 
audiovisual  media  services  (Audiovisual  Media  Services  Directive)  in  view  of  changing  market 
realities. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2022),  Flash  Eurobarometer  507:  businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General for Communication (2022), Special Eurobarometer 523: corruption. 

Economic  Court  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Latvian  Economic  Court  for  the  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Latvia. 

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Latvia. 

European Commission (2021), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2022), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 10 January 2019, Ecis v. Latvia, 12879/09. 

20 

 
European Implementation Network (2022), Contribution from the European Implementation Network 
for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI) (2022),  Contribution from the 
European Network of National Human Rights Institutions for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Franet, Latvian Centre for Human Rights (2022), Country research – Legal environment and space of 
civil  society  organisations  in  supporting  fundamental  rights  –  Latvia,  Vienna,  EU  Agency  for 
Fundamental  Rights, 
https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2022/civic-space-2022-update#country-
related . 

Internal Security Bureau (2022), Written contribution from the Internal Security Bureau following the 
country visit to Latvia.  

Judicial Council (2021), Press release, ‘Judicial Council conceptually supports the establishment of 
the  single  Judicial  Training  Centre’  https://www.at.gov.lv/en/jaunumi/par-tieslietu-padomi/judicial-
council-conceptually-supports-the-establishment-of-the-single-judicial-training-centre-10700.  

Judicial Council, Decision No. 77 of 12 November 2021. 

Latvian  Association  of Journalists  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Latvian  Association  of  Journalists 
for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Latvian  Civic  Alliance  (2021),  Press  release,  ‘Decision  to  maintain  the  current  participatory 
practice’ https://nvo.lv/lv/zina/lemj_saglabat_lidzsinejo_lidzdalibas_praksi.  

Latvian  Civic  Alliance  (2021),  Press  release,  ‘Latvian  Civic  Alliance  calls  on  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers 
involvement’ 
in 
https://nvo.lv/lv/zina/lpa_aicina_ministru_kabinetu_nepielaut_sabiedribas_iesaistes_iespeju_samazina
sanos.  

opportunities 

reduction 

prevent 

public 

for 

to 

a 

Latvian Government (2022), Input from Latvia for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Latvian  Public  Service  Media  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Latvian  Public  Service  Media  for  the 
2022 Rule of Law Report. 

(2022), 

Lsm.lv 
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/politics/diplomacy/experts-critical-of-saeimas-rejection-of-supreme-court-
candidate.a444151/  

‘Experts  critical  of  Saeima's  rejection  of  Supreme  Court  candidate’ 

Lsm.lv  (2022),  ‘Latvian  President  denies  exerting 
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/politics/president/lavian-president-denies-exerting-inappropriate-pressure-
on-politicians.a422742/ 

inappropriate  pressure  on  politicians’ 

(2022), 

Lsm.lv 
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/politics/saeima/saeima-rejects-controversial-supreme-court-
candidate.a444057/ 

controversial 

Supreme 

‘Saeima 

rejects 

Court 

candidate’ 

Ministry of Justice (2022), Contribution from the Ministry of Justice for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

(2021),  Anti-Bribery  Convention  Latvia  phase  3 

OECD 
https://www.oecd.org/corruption/Latvia-phase-3-follow-up-report-en.pdf.  

two-year 

follow-up 

report, 

(2021),  Performance  of 

OECD 
ilibrary.org/docserver/c0113907-
en.pdf?expires=1654583288&id=id&accname=oid031827&checksum=3ED8B5A47769ADC213AB7
D9D2ED11A86.  

in  Latvia  https://www.oecd-

the  Prosecution  Services 

Ombudsperson’s 
https://www.tiesibsargs.lv/uploads/content/annual_report_2021_1652184031.pdf.  

(2022), 

Office 

2021 

Report 

Ombudsperson’s  Office (2022),  Contribution  from the  Ombudsperson’s  Office  for  the  2022  Rule  of 
Law Report. 

21 

 
Prosecution General’s Office (2022), Contribution from the Prosecution General’s Office for the 2022 
Rule of Law Report. 

Reporters Without Borders - Latvia https://rsf.org/en/country/latvia  

State Audit Office (2020), Performance audit Effectiveness of investigations and trials of the criminal 
offences in the economic and financial area.  

State  Audit  Office  (2021),  Press  release,  Plan  to  implement  the  SAO’s  recommendations  for 
streamlining prosecution of economic and financial crimes. 

State Audit Office (2022), Contribution from the State Audit Office for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

State  Border  Guard  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  State  Border  Guard  for  the  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

State Chancellery (2022), Contribution from the State Chancellery for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

State Police (2022), Contribution from the State Police for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

State Revenue Service (2022), Contribution from the State Revenue Service for the 2022 Rule of Law 
Report. 

Supreme Court (2022), Contribution from the Supreme Court for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Supreme  Court,  Administrative  Chamber,  judgment  of  16  July  2021,  Case  No  SA-1/2021, 
ECLI:LV:AT:2021:0716.SA000121.5.S 

Supreme Court, Administrative Chamber, judgment of 21 October 2021, Case No A420268820, SKA-
1038/2021, ECLI:LV:AT:2021:1021.A420268820.4.L 

Supreme Court, Decision No 2 of 18 February 2022, ‘On the relationship between the legislature and 
judge’ 
the 
https://www.at.gov.lv/files/uploads/files/2_Par_Augstako_tiesu/Plenums/plenuma%20lemums2%201
8022022.docx  

independence 

judiciary 

and 

the 

the 

of 

Supreme Court, Decision No 2 of 9 December 2021, ‘On ensuring the right to a fair trial and uniform 
case 
work’ 
of 
https://www.at.gov.lv/files/uploads/files/2_Par_Augstako_tiesu/Plenums/plenuma%20lemums2%200
9122021.docx.  

digitalisation 

context 

court 

law 

the 

of 

in 

Transparency International (2022),  Contribution from Transparency International for the 2022 Rule 
of Law Report. 

Transparency International (2022), Corruption Perceptions Index 2021.  

Transparency  International  Latvia  in  cooperation  with  Transparency  International  Norway  (2021), 
Transparency Index of Local Authorities, https://delna.lv/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Transparency-
Index-Local-Authorities-2021.pdf.  

22 

 
Annex II: Country visit to Latvia 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March 2022 with: 

Internal Security Board of the State Revenue Service 
Judicial Council 

  Association of Journalists 
  Association of Judges 
  Bar Association 
  Civic Alliance Latvia 
  Constitutional Court 
  Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau (KNAB) 
  Council of Lawyers 
  Delna – TI Latvia 
  Economic Court 
  Foreign Investors’ Council in Latvia (FICIL) 
 
 
  Latvijas Televīzija (LTV) 
  Ministry of Culture 
  Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
  Ministry of Interior 
  Ministry of Justice 
  National Electronic Mass Media Council 
  Ombudsperson’s Office 
  Parliamentary Working group for the elaboration of a lobbying transparency law 
  Prosecutor’s Office 
  Providus 
  Public Electronic Mass Media Council 
  State Audit Office 
  State Border Guard 
  State Chancellery 
  State Police 
  Supreme Court 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  Amnesty International  
  Article 19  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
  Civil Society Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  
  European Civic Forum 
  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy 
  European Youth Forum 
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Human Rights Watch  
 
 
 
  Open Society European Policy Institute ( OSEPI) 
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa  

ILGA Europe 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) 
International Press Institute 

23 

 
 
  Philea 
  Reporters Without Borders 
  Transparency International Europe 

24